<i>Letter to the Editior</i>Testing the hypothesis of the influence of neutral turbulence on the deduction of ambipolar diffusivities from meteor trail expansion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Fading times of radar echoes from underdense meteor trails in the upper mesosphere/lower thermosphere are commonly used to determine ambipolar diffusivities and hence ambient temperature. Diffusivities are generally expected to increase exponentially with height through the region from which the meteor trail echoes are obtained, viz., typically 70-110km altitude for a ~30-MHz radar. In practice, however, this is more the exception: unexpectedly large diffusivities are obtained in the lower part of the regime, and unexpectedly low values are obtained in the upper part; only in the few kilometres on either side of the maximum in echo occurrence (viz., 90km for a 30-MHz radar) does the diffusivity profile behave as expected. Hall (2002) hypothesised that neutral turbulence might be enhancing expansion of the meteor trail in the lower part of the regime. In this communication, due to results only available since the publication of Hall's suggestion, we are able to refute the hypothesis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.026 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".